Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
...
Don't care if the rights holders make money or not. The relevant point is that the works belong to them, not society.
Don't care about that point either. Again, the relevant point is that the works belong to them, not society. Even if they collect millions by sitting back and doing nothing, the fact is, they own it, period!
|
You keep asserting that, yet it's not true and never has been. Simply dogmatically repeating it doesn't make it true. As I keep repeating because you and leebase keep ignoring the point, but copyright is NOT property. It is a government granted monopoly to copy a specific work. That's what it's been since the initial grant and that's what it is now. An author may feel that a specific work is theirs, theirs alone and they hold absolute control over it now and forever, but just because they feel that way, doesn't make it true.
At the time of Queen Anne, the publishing guide actually had the copyright, not the author. The author would sell a work to a publisher. The change to the copyright was to assign the copyright to the author, not to the publisher and to limit the copyright to a specific time. It was well understood at that time that the arts and sciences built on the works of previous generations. As Newton said "I stand on the shoulders of giants". Eternal copyright (and patents) takes away that continuity.